I REMAIN perplexed why, after the very full debate on the Local Plan in council, the main spokesmen for the Football Club continue to insist that their plans/hopes have been destroyed/dashed by the Inspector's findings and the council's support for them (Evening News, Wednesday, April 28).

It was made very clear in the debate that this was not true. Both the Inspector's report and the council, as a whole, remain supportive of the club's wish to move from their current site and the need for enabling development to make this possible.

The key policy making this possible, CLT 30, remains part of the draft Local Plan even after the amendments proposed by the Inspector.

All that has happened is that the Inspector has made it clear that whether the club makes a planning application under the short form of CLT 30, which has always been in the plan and which he prefers, or under the extended form of CLT 30, proposed by the council last year and which he doesn't like, there will have to be the same satisfactory answers to the planning questions posed by national and local policy.

Thus unless the club still believes that they, or the council, can, in some clever way, manipulate the rules so as to avoid providing adequate evidence to answer the questions that policy and fairness demand, then Councillor Francis Lankester was right when he said: "Please football club, go through the proper process where you can get something that is a planning application with evidence".

So let me say to the club: "We would like you to succeed with your dream, you know what has to be done for any proposed scheme to be recommended for approval, please get on with it - it doesn't get any easier by delaying action".

BARRY MACKENZIE-WILLIAMS,

Councillor,

St Clement ward,

Worcester.